I'm not "offended" by the limit on lending your books. I just think it's 100% WRONG to knowingly and deliberately mislead people. Burying something in fine print or an FAQ saying "well, what we said isn't really what we MEANT" is wrong.

They tout "lending" as a big selling point, but aren't being HONEST about it. That's what bothers me. I'm just getting really tired of businesses being dishonest (and yes, I view it as dishonest to say "You can lend your books" and then bury a disclaimer somewhere saying "but only once - forever!")

Then you add on the fact that they are trying to hide (or at least obfuscate) the fact that you can only "lend" if the publisher thinks you should be allowed to. More dishonesty.

I've been looking to upgrade my wife's sony 500, and this just helped ensure that I'll be going with the sony 600 instead of the Nook.

They are not being dishonest. They tell you that a feature of the system is that you can lend your books. I really think it is silly to not realize that there will be limits on that.

It seems to me that there are some people who are just looking for a reason to not like it.

They are not being dishonest. They tell you that a feature of the system is that you can lend your books. I really think it is silly to not realize that there will be limits on that.

Do they sell their pbooks with the ability to lend them once, for a maximum of 14 days? Why would anyone assume that ebook lending comes with that kind of limit?

The other limits built into it seem reasonable--receiver must have an email address and a BN-software-compatible device. Nobody's complaining about those aspects. They're complaining about the limitations on lending because, well, "to lend" doesn't mean "to hand to one other person for a maximum of two weeks." Advertising "it will allow lending" implies neither "once per book" nor "two weeks per book."

I like the idea of "we've figured out how to lock you away from your purchase, and hand it to someone else with different DRM arrangements." Yay. Ebooks NEED that.

And, in order for ebook purchasers to have their full legal rights, they need unlimited access to it. Lend or re-sell at will, just like pbooks. (Does this mean "less income to publishers?" Yes... and so do used bookstore purchases.) They have no legal right to insist that ebooks are non-transferable property.

Do they sell their pbooks with the ability to lend them once, for a maximum of 14 days? Why would anyone assume that ebook lending comes with that kind of limit?
.....
And, in order for ebook purchasers to have their full legal rights, they need unlimited access to it. Lend or re-sell at will, just like pbooks. ..

... They have no legal right to insist that ebooks are non-transferable property.

They are not being dishonest. They tell you that a feature of the system is that you can lend your books. I really think it is silly to not realize that there will be limits on that.

It seems to me that there are some people who are just looking for a reason to not like it.

Actually, I quite liked the device, but I still view it as dishonest to have big bold print "You can lend your books" and making people search to find the small print of "if the publisher will allow it" and "only once - forever".

I don't think it's a natural assumption that "Lending your books" means once, forever. Assuming some kind of limitation, maybe (although not with their particular wording - no limitation is stated OR implied), but there's no way most people would assume "Oh, 'you can lend your books' means I can lend it to one time - forever".

I think DesertGrandma had it right - list it as LIMITED ability to lend, and I wouldn't have had a problem.

Make it clear from the start, and I have no problem. Deliberately try to mislead people, and yes - I view it as dishonest.

They are not being dishonest. They tell you that a feature of the system is that you can lend your books. I really think it is silly to not realize that there will be limits on that.

It seems to me that there are some people who are just looking for a reason to not like it.

I would say because they use of the "lend your ebooks" as a sales enticement but without and OBVIOUS disclaimer as to limitations, is actionable deceptive advertising. It only hurts all people who want these devices to succeed when these big companies come up with these behind-the-curtain draconian limitations.

I would say what B&N is doing it trying to make it look like their system is the same as Amazon's where you can have a book on I believe 6-devices at the same time as long as those devices are registered to your account. The more I read about B&N the better Amazon looks...and that takes some effort on B&N's part.

I would say because they use of the "lend your ebooks" as a sales enticement but without and OBVIOUS disclaimer as to limitations, is actionable deceptive advertising. It only hurts all people who want these devices to succeed when these big companies come up with these behind-the-curtain draconian limitations.

I would say what B&N is doing it trying to make it look like their system is the same as Amazon's where you can have a book on I believe 6-devices at the same time as long as those devices are registered to your account. The more I read about B&N the better Amazon looks...and that takes some effort on B&N's part.

Sony also allows the authorization of multiple devices on one account (allowing the sharing of books).

If B&N's DRM is still based on your name and credit card number, then you can have it on an unlimited number of devices.

This in my opinion is the best of the DRM schemes (better if there was none though).

I have to agree with that, tying it to a specific device is a mess, but so is tying it to your credit card. Best is to not have this silly stuff at all -- let's encourage the book industry to at least catch up with the music industry. Sheesh!

While the interpretation of the B&N rep's answer to the OPs question seems likely, the statement is a bit ambiguous. Could the B&N rep be thinking about the limit on the recipient of the loan rather than the lender? In other words, can you lend the book only once or only once to any single recipient? I think some clarification is necessary before everybody writes the nook off. I think most would still prefer a still less restrictive lending policy than even one short loan per recipient, but the difference between one loan period & one per recipient is fairly significant.

If it turns out that the policy is indeed one loan period, it is not impossible with some concerted pressure that B&N might change the policy somewhat to mollify potential customers.

I'm not a likely purchaser of the nook w/ a 6" screen as I'm used to my Iliad, so I'm not the one to pursue this. Just thought it worth raising the possibilities.

I found nothing ambiguous about the final answer. Kevin was quite clear, you can loan a book out ONCE, not once per person or device, but once. Period. End of discussion. He basically said to be happy for that much.

I find it sad that they tried to NOT answer this question and kept quoting the FAQ's ambiguous answer until called out point blank for a clearer meaning. There has been enough talk about this over at the B&N site that the matter would have been cleared up if it wasn't ONCE and ONCE ONLY.

The lending shouldn't even come into consideration when deciding what reader to get, IMHO, at this point. That and $5 will get you a coffee.

Ah damnit. One time loan is useless. DRM is fine as long as I et the same rights that I would have on a paper book + be able to read on multiple devices. I can lend my paper book to multiple friends, this is just lame nook.

If it turns out that the policy is indeed one loan period, it is not impossible with some concerted pressure that B&N might change the policy somewhat to mollify potential customers.

My concern about putting pressure on B&N is that their hands will be tied by agreements with the publishers. Will they be able to change a policy that affects the contracts that they likely already have? I can't imagine a major publisher would accept a change to something like this, and I feel pretty confident that this policy is the result of compromises with the publishers (though, of course, I could be wrong.)

I found nothing ambiguous about the final answer. Kevin was quite clear, you can loan a book out ONCE, not once per person or device, but once. Period. End of discussion. He basically said to be happy for that much.

I find it sad that they tried to NOT answer this question and kept quoting the FAQ's ambiguous answer until called out point blank for a clearer meaning. There has been enough talk about this over at the B&N site that the matter would have been cleared up if it wasn't ONCE and ONCE ONLY.

The lending shouldn't even come into consideration when deciding what reader to get, IMHO, at this point. That and $5 will get you a coffee.

where the heck do you buy your cups of coffee? I walk to Starbucks a few days/week as well as the new coffee at McDonald's (which is quite good believe it or not) and the prices are something like $1.85 & $1.75, respectively, for a 20oz "cup" (fyi, a cup of coffee is considered to be only 5oz. I know because my doc points it out all the time...hehehehe...). Still a bit spendy but at Starbucks I get free wifi and if I want one, a refill is like $0.50, but just a 20oz. "mug" coffee is not $5 anywhere I travel.